Questions and Replies
24 May 2016 - NW802
Van Damme, Ms PT to ask the Minister of Communications
(1) Whether the Acting Director-General of her department signed a performance contract with her; if not, why not; if so (a) when and (b) what are the key deliverables listed in the specified performance contract; (2) whether all senior managers in her department signed performance contracts with the Acting Director-General, if not, (a) which senior managers did not sign, (b) for what reasons and (c) when will they sign them; if so, on what date did each senior manager sign a performance contract?
Reply:
1. No, the Acting Director General did not sign a Performance Agreement for the 2015/16 financial year.
2. Not all Senior Managers submitted Performance Agreements.
(a) Ms R Fisher, Ms P Pillay, Mr MJ Rantete and Mr F Nieman.
(b) These SMS members occupied their posts during the course of the year.
(c) The officials have signed 2016/17 Performance Agreements in line with the 15 April 2016 deadline.
MR NN MUNZHELELE
DIRECTOR GENERAL [ACTING]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS
DATE:
MS AF MUTHAMBI (MP)
MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS
DATE
24 May 2016 - NW1096
Boshoff, Ms SH to ask the Minister of Basic Education
How many online registrations by educators were received by the SA Council for Educators in each (a) province and (b) district in the (i) 2012-13, (ii) 2013-14 and (iii) 2014-15 financial years?
Reply:
According to the South African Council for Educators (SACE) Annual Performance Plan, educators were registered as follows, both on-and off-line:
2013/14: 25 315
2014/15: 26 000
2015/16: 20 000 educators were targeted for registration.
The online system is being piloted from April to June 2016. Data will then be available.
24 May 2016 - NW426
Boshoff, Ms SH to ask the Minister of Basic Education
(1)How many sign language teachers are currently appropriately trained to teach sign language in the (a) foundation, (b) intermediate, (c) senior and (d) Further Education and Training phases of the education system; (2) (a) what are the names of schools that cater for learners with hearing impairments and (b) how many of the appropriately trained teachers are deployed to teach at the specified schools in each province; (3) (a) how many full service schools are catering for learners with hearing impairments, (b) what are the names of the schools and (c) how many appropriately trained teachers are deployed at each of the specified schools in each province; (4) what steps are being taken to bridge the gap caused by shortages for appropriately trained sign language teachers?
Reply:
1. (a), (b), (c) and (d). The table below shows the number of appropriately trained sign language teachers at Foundation, Intermediate, Senior and Further Education and Training Phases in each province.
Province |
|
|
(c)Senior Phase |
(d)Further Education and Training Phase |
Total |
Eastern Cape |
35 |
22 |
26 |
16 |
99 |
Free State |
16 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
24 |
Gauteng |
11 |
10 |
11 |
1 |
33 |
KwaZulu-Natal |
31 |
||||
Limpopo |
26 |
20 |
22 |
17 |
85 |
Mpumalanga |
13 |
9 |
No school catering for FET |
22 |
|
North West |
12 |
11 |
2 |
0 |
25 |
Northern Cape |
4 |
3(7) |
3(6) |
2(5) |
12(18) |
Western Cape |
7 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
22 |
Source: Provincial reporting
2. (a) and (b). The table below shows the names of schools that cater for learners with hearing impairments; and the number of appropriately trained teachers in specified schools in each province.
Province |
(a) School |
(b) Number of Teachers |
Eastern Cape |
Efata |
35 |
St Thomas |
28 |
|
Reubin Birin |
21 |
|
Sive |
15 |
|
Totals |
4 |
99 |
Free State |
Bartimea Special School |
13 |
Thiboloha Special School |
11 (2 specialist teachers teaching sign language as a subject. |
|
TOTAL |
2 |
24 |
Gauteng |
Dominican |
9 (7) |
Filadelfia |
2(4) |
|
Katlehong School for the Deaf |
6(7) |
|
MC Kharbai |
4(4) |
|
Sizwile |
5(3) |
|
St Vincent |
4(3) |
|
Transoranje |
3(3) |
|
Totals |
7 |
33(31) |
KwaZulu-Natal |
Fulton School for the Deaf |
2 (4) assistants in brackets. |
KwaThintwa School for the Deaf |
2(6) |
|
VN Naik School for the Deaf |
3(4) |
|
Durban School for the Deaf |
3(4) |
|
KwaVulindlebe School for the Deaf |
0(5) |
|
Indaleni School for the Deaf |
1(7) |
|
Vuleka School for the Deaf |
7(5) |
|
St Martin de Porres |
8(2) |
|
Bumbisizwe Special School |
1(2) |
|
Inkanyezi Special School |
2(1) |
|
Inkanyiso Special School |
0(1) |
|
TOTAL |
11 |
29(43) |
Limpopo |
Setotolwane |
34 |
Yingisani |
17 |
|
Bosele |
15 |
|
Tshilidzini |
15 |
|
Sedibeng |
4 |
|
TOTAL |
5 |
85 |
Mpumalanga |
Kamagugu |
6 |
Silindokuhle |
12 |
|
Bukhosibetfu |
4 |
|
Marietjie |
2 |
|
Wolvenkop |
3 |
|
TOTAL |
5 |
27 |
Northern Cape |
Retlamelang |
12 |
TOTAL |
1 |
12 |
Western Cape |
||
De la Bat |
80% 0f teachers in the schools completed SASL linguistic training university level |
|
Nuwe Hoop |
||
Dominican Wittebome |
||
Mary Kihn |
||
Noluthando School |
||
Source: Provincial reporting
(3) (a)(b)(c). The table below shows the number and names full service schools catering for learners with hearing impairments; and the number of appropriately trained teachers deployed at each school. Only the Free State and Mpumalanga have Full Service Schools that cater for learners with hearing impairments.
|
|
Free State |
|
Botle ba Thuto P/S |
|
Jagersfontein I/S |
|
Mofulatshepe P/S |
|
Oranjekrag I/S |
|
Zama P/S |
|
Christiaan de Wet I/S (Ordinary School) |
|
Gelukwaarts IF/S |
|
Hermana P/S |
|
Jim Fouche P/S |
|
Mabela P/S |
|
Maboloka P/S |
|
Pontsheng P/S |
|
Dieketseng P/S |
|
Hlaboloha P/S |
|
Kegomoditswe |
|
Winburg C/S |
|
Kweetsa P/S |
|
Letsibolo P/s |
|
Malebaleba P/S |
|
Ntuthuzelo P/S |
|
Refihletse P/S |
|
Reseamohetse P/S |
|
Thoriso P/S |
|
Chris van Niekerk I/S |
|
JJ Kubheka P/S |
|
Ntshwephepa P/S |
|
Poelamo P/S |
|
Sentrale Volkskool P/S |
|
Theha Setjhaba P/S |
|
Lesoana P/S |
|
Letlotlo P/S |
|
Mafube P/S |
|
Leifo Iziko I/S |
|
Mphatlalatsane P/S |
|
Masaleng P/S |
|
Pulamadiboho P/S |
|
Qhubeka P/S |
|
Sekgothadi P/S |
|
Theboho P/s |
|
TOTAL= 41 SCHOOLS |
|
MPUMALANGA |
|
Bukihosibetfu Full Service School |
4 |
TOTAL= 1 SCHOOL |
Source: Provincial reporting
(4) The following are the steps taken to bridge the gap caused by shortages for appropriately trained sign language teachers in each province.
Eastern Cape
The Eastern Cape Department of Education has entered into a partnership with the Education and Training Sector Education and Training Authority (ETDP SETA) to train all educators in four Schools for the Deaf. The EDTP SETA has in turn, contracted University of Witwatersrand (WITS) to train educators in two workshops of five days per year in 2014 and 2015. The partnership with Sector Education and Training Authority (SETA) continues in the 2016/17 until all educators in these schools are qualified to teach Sign Language.
Free State
Teachers at Bartimea and Thiboloha Special Schools for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing were trained on the South African Sign Language (SASL) Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statements (CAPS) at Home Language level. Teachers were also trained on sign language as a means of communication.
Gauteng
- Continuous SASL competency training takes place.
- Currently all teachers teaching SASL as a subject have NQF Level 5.
- All SASL teachers have deaf class assistants to compliment the language skill and to adopt the team teaching approach;
- Collaboration with Wits Centre for Deaf Studies to assist with Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statements (CAPS) for SASL, focusing on prose and poetry.
KwaZulu-Natal
The Inclusive Education Directorate has arranged with ETDP SETA to fund SASL training and the up-skilling of teachers from the above-mentioned schools. ETDP SETA has secured the services of the Wits Language School to undertake the training, assessment and certification of teachers. In the current training cohort, there are six (6) District officials and fifty seven (57) teachers receiving training in SASL. The training programme which extends over 15 days commenced in December 2015 and will continue in March-April 2016.
Mpumalanga
- There is ongoing orientation of stakeholders on the approved SASL CAPS which includes, Curriculum Implementers (CIs), School Management Teams (SMTs), Deaf Teacher Assistants and educators;
- The Education department of Mpumalanga is providing training of teachers, Language Subject Advisors and Deaf teacher assistants on SASL;
- 45 teachers have to date been trained on NQF Level 4 and 5;
- 60 Foundation Phase Language Subject Advisors and Inclusive Education officials have been trained on the basics of SASL; and
- For the financial year 2015/16, 60 teachers will be trained on NQF Level 4 and 5 by the University of Free State. The training will take place from 25 February to 12 March 2016.
Limpopo
All teachers teaching learners with hearing impairments have been trained on basic SASL and further advanced training at the University (Advanced Diploma) level is planned for the future.
Western Cape
18 educators are being trained on SASL through the ETDPSETA by the University of Witwatersrand. Of the number given eight (8) are doing the advance level. In 2014 to 2015; thirty four (34) educators and officials were trained on SASL. The training on SASL will continue annually for all the educators.
24 May 2016 - NW685
America, Mr D to ask the Minister of Communications
(a) How many set-top boxes (STBs) were installed countrywide by 29 February 2016, (b) which service providers were contracted to install the specified STBs, and (c) what amount has each service provider been paid to date for the installation of STBs in each case?
Reply:
(a) The Universal Service and Access Agency for South Africa, which is the entity charged with the responsibility of managing the production and installation of set top boxes, informed me that 823 STBs were installed country wide as at 29 February 2016.
(b) The companies USAASA contracted to install the specified STBs are: Amigen Investments, Duramics Trading & Projects, Ketelelo Trading, Krosworx, KST Consortium, Lamec, Maziya Construction, Silverwell Business Enterprise and Ellies Industries.
(c) USAASA further informed me that Amigen Investments was paid R15,400.00; Duramics Trading & Projects was paid R 3,850.00; Ketelelo Trading was paid R15,950.00; Krosworx was paid R14,300.00; KST Consortium was paid R2,750.00; Lamec was paid R18,150.00; Maziya Construction was paid R12,650.00; Silverwell Business Enterprise was paid R24,200.00; and Ellies Industries has not redeemed any vouchers at SAPO.
MR NN MUNZHELELE
DIRECTOR GENERAL [ACTING]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS
DATE:
MS AF MUTHAMBI (MP)
MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS
DATE:
24 May 2016 - NW1455
Mulder, Dr PW to ask the Minister of Arts and Culture
(1)(a).How many translators are currently in service to his department, (b) in which languages do the specified translators perform translation work and (c) what is the average annual remuneration of (i) a translator and (ii) the sum total of all the translators in his department; (2) whether he has taken any steps or plans to take steps with regard to building capacity of translation services in his department; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Reply:
- (a). There is currently a total of fifteen (15) translators in service to the department,
- (b) these in house translators perform translation work in all the official languages including French and Portuguese,
- (c) (i) the annual remuneration of translators are according to their levels which are level eight (8) with notches ranging from 91,404 to 107,670 and level nine (9) with notches ranging from 311, 784 – 376, 626 per annum, (ii) the sum total of all the translators in the department is fifteen (15).
(2). Yes, steps have been taken in the department with regards to building of capacity of translation services. Translators attended on-going development training in areas such as basic copy editing, proof reading and advancement in foreign languages. In addition, there are a number of translators who have registered with various institutions of higher learning through the DAC bursary scheme for the long term formal programs such as studies in applied linguistics.
24 May 2016 - NW1366
McLoughlin, Mr AR to ask the Minister of Water and Sanitation
Whether her department acquired any (a) hardware and/or (b) software information technology equipment in the (i) 2014-15 and (ii) 2015-16 financial years; if not, why not; if so, what are the full details in each case in terms of (aa) what were the tender requirements, (bb) where were the relevant tender advertisements placed, (cc) who were the members of each bid adjudication committee, (dd)(aaa) where and (bbb) when did each of the specified bid adjudication committees sit, (ee)(aaa) how many tender applications were received for each advertised tender and (bbb) from whom, (ff) who was the successful bidder in each case and (gg) on what basis was each tender awarded to the specified successful bidder?
Reply:
Refer to the table below for the summary of the acquired hardware and software for the periods in question:
(i) 2014-15 financial years |
(ii) 2015-16 financial year |
|
(a) Hardware |
My Department awarded three (3) tenders for the acquisition of hardware |
My Department awarded three (3) tenders for the acquisition of hardware |
(b) Software |
No tenders were awarded for acquisition of software |
My Department awarded four (4) tenders for the acquisition of software |
The specific details for the tenders awarded for the acquisition of hardware and software during the period in question is detailed in Annexure A.
---00O00---
24 May 2016 - NW804
Van Damme, Ms PT to ask the Minister of Communications
(a) What was the purpose of her attendance at the International Development Corporation meeting on Gender and Media in Geneva, Switzerland from 7 to 10 December 2015, (b) what are the (i) names and (ii) positions of the persons who accompanied her and (c) what was the (i) total cost and (ii) breakdown of the costs of the specified trip?
Reply:
(a) The Honourable Member will remember that the main aim of the framework on Gender and Media International Cooperation is to support the implementation of the “Women and the Media follow-up” for section J of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, Women and the Media. Now, the Minister was invited by UNESCO to share ideas and experience with the world on how the South African government is making strides in terms of promoting and championing gender equality in all forms of the media; how we as government we are encouraging women to take advantage of the revolution in communications technology in order to make their voice to be heard across the country.
The Minister was invited to make opening and closing statements at this global forum as well as chairing two sessions, however, Mr Johannes Rantete attended the global assembly on behalf of Minister Faith Muthambi. The South African delegation led by Mr Rantete used the platform to urge the international community to put gender equality and women’s empowerment in the media at the heart of all discussions and agreements. Again, the Geneva Framework on Gender and Media International Development Cooperation resonates with the contemporary agenda:
- Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 5: Achieving gender equality and empowering women and girls,
- SDG 16, target 10: Concerning measures to promote public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms,
- SDG 17: Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development.
A series of stories about this event were published on the government online news agency: SAnews.gov.za as well as on social networks.
(b) (i) Mr Johannes Rantete (attended in place of Minister);
Mr Mishack Molakeng; and
Mr Nthambeleni Gabara.
(ii) Acting Director-General: GCIS;
Media Liaison Officer: Ministry of Communications
Assistant Director: SA News
(c) (i) The total amount is still in the process of being audited and will subsequently be made available.
(ii) The breakdown is also not available as it still needs to be audited.
MR NN MUNZHELELE
DIRECTOR GENERAL [ACTING]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS
DATE:
MS AF MUTHAMBI (MP)
MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS
DATE:
24 May 2016 - NW1485
Maimane, Mr MA to ask the Minister of Defence and Military Veterans
(a) How many flights have been made in military helicopters between the President’s private residence in Nkandla and Durban in KwaZulu-Natal, between 1 February 2015 and 17 May 2016 and (b) what was the total cost of each specified flight?
Reply:
The information required relates to the movement of the President and for security reasons, the response to this question can only be presented to closed session of the Joint Standing Committee on Defence.
24 May 2016 - NW1435
Krumbock, Mr GR to ask the Minister of Labour
(1) (a) on what date did her department conducted an inspection of the Chloorkop Primary School in Kempton Park, Gauteng, through the inspection and enforcement services in line with the Occupational Health and Safety Act, Act 85 of 1993, as amended, (b) what were the findings of the specified inspections and (c) how often is her department compelled by law to inspect work environments in line with (i) the specified Act and (ii) any other legislation; (2) (a) when will her department conduct such an inspection at the specified school, given the structural damage to the school’s buildings (details furnished) and (b) when will such a report be made public?
Reply:
1 (a) No inspection conducted at Chloorkop Primary School in Kempton Park, Gauteng.
(b) Due to the fact that there was no inspection conducted, there are no findings.
(c) There is no stipulation in the Occupational Heath and Safety Act regarding the frequency of inspections for any workplace and there is no other legislation.
(2) (a) Inspection will be conducted at end of May 2016.
(b) inspection reports are not made public in terms of Section 36 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act as amended.
24 May 2016 - NW1456
Mulder, Dr PW to ask the MINISTER OF ARTS AND CULTURE
(1) Why he and his department are making use of a certain private firm of attorneys (name furnished) in a certain court case (details furnished) instead of the services of the State Attorney; (2) What have the legal costs of the (a) attorneys and (b) advocates in the specified court case amounted to for him and his department to date? (NW1607E)
Reply:
1. The Department appointed Cheadle; Thompson & Haysom attorneys since they previously dealt with similar language related cases initiated by the said Lourens and were therefore familiar and more knowledgeable regarding the issues at hand. Furthermore, the said attorneys had assisted the Department in drafting the Use of Official Languages Act in 2012 and their appointment was thus necessary to ensure continuity and effectiveness in addressing the language related issues.
2. The legal costs of the (a) attorneys amount to R726 186.70 and (b) R694 925.69 for advocates to date.
24 May 2016 - NW670
Vos, Mr J to ask the Minister of Public Works:
With reference to the total state of collapse and disrepair of the Op Die Berg Police Station in the Koue Bokkeveld and the wholly inadequate resources available at the specified police station to service its vast rural and farming area, (a) when will (i) upgrades and/or (ii) repairs to the specified station take place and (b) what are the relevant details of the (i) upgrades and/or (ii) repairs that will take place? REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA Department of Public Works l Central Government Offices l 256 Madiba Street l Pretoria l Contact: +27 (0)12 406 2034 l +27 (0)12 406 1224 Private Bag X9155 l CAPE TOWN, 8001 l RSA 4th Floor Parliament Building l 120 Plain Street l CAPE TOWN l Tel: +27 21 468 6900 Fax: +27 21 462 4592 www.publicworks.gov.za NATIONAL ASSEMBLY WRITTEN REPLY QUESTION NUMBER: 670 [NW785E] INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO.:No. 08 of 2016 DATE OF PUBLICATION: 11 MARCH 2016 DATE OF REPLY:24 MAY 2016 Mr J Vos (DA) asked the Minister of Public Works: With reference to the total state of collapse and disrepair of the Op Die Berg Police Station in the Koue Bokkeveld and the wholly inadequate resources available at the specified police station to service its vast rural and farming area, (a) when will (i) upgrades and/or (ii) repairs to the specified station take place and (b) what are the relevant details of the (i) upgrades and/or (ii) repairs that will take place? NW785E REPLY: The Minister of Public Works The National Department of Public Works (NDPW) has established that the property where the Op Die Berg Police Station in Die Koue Bokkeveld is currently accommodated is under the custodianship of the Provincial Government of the Western Cape (PGWC). The maintenance of this police station is therefore, currently, not being done by the NDPW. However, it is the responsibility of the NDPW to provide accommodation to the SAPS in terms of its police stations. To this extent, this anomaly is being rectified in tandem with the PGWC and a request for the compilation of a formal lease agreement has been submitted. The formal lease agreement with the PGWC shall specify responsibilities for maintenance and will provide answers to the following: (a) when (i) the upgrades and/or (ii) repairs to the specified station shall take place; and (b) the relevant details of the (i) upgrades and/or (ii) repairs that will take place. ________________________________________________________________________
Reply:
The Minister of Public Works
The National Department of Public Works (NDPW) has established that the property where the Op Die Berg Police Station in Die Koue Bokkeveld is currently accommodated is under the custodianship of the Provincial Government of the Western Cape (PGWC). The maintenance of this police station is therefore, currently, not being done by the NDPW. However, it is the responsibility of the NDPW to provide accommodation to the SAPS in terms of its police stations. To this extent, this anomaly is being rectified in tandem with the PGWC and a request for the compilation of a formal lease agreement has been submitted.
The formal lease agreement with the PGWC shall specify responsibilities for maintenance and will provide answers to the following:
(a) when (i) the upgrades and/or (ii) repairs to the specified station shall take place; and
(b) the relevant details of the (i) upgrades and/or (ii) repairs that will take place.
________________________________________________________________________
24 May 2016 - NW1457
Mulder, Dr PW to ask the Minister of Arts and Culture
(1) Whether his department has a database of all available translators in each of the national departments, national bodies and national entities; if not why not; if so, (2) how many translators are able to perform translation work in each national department, national body and national entity respectively? (3) Whether he has taken steps or is planning to take steps with regard to the building of capacity in respect of translation services in national departments, national bodies and national entities; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Reply:
In relation to the question of translators in other departments, I am unable to provide answers since these departments are not accountable to me. The honourable Member must feel free to ask each of the departments of government and their respective entities.
24 May 2016 - NW1423
Figg, Mr MJ to ask the Minister of Basic Education
What was the total cost of photocopying text books in the Free State in the 2015 academic year due to the non-delivery and/or late delivery of the specified books?
Reply:
The Free State Province does not photo copy textbooks for schools. Schools choose to make photo copies on their own, using equipment at schools, due to an increased number of learners or while awaiting delivery of textbooks. The associated costs are minimal to the school.
24 May 2016 - NW1528
Cardo, Dr MJ to ask the Minister of State Security
Whether his department was approached by any political party for any form of funding (a) in the (i) 2013-14, (ii) 2014-15 and (iii) 2015-16 financial years and (b) since 1 April 2016; if so, what are the relevant details in each case; (2) Whether his department provided any form of funding to any political party (a) in the (i) 2013-14, (ii) 2014-15 and (iii) 2015-16; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details in each case?
Reply:
The State Security Agency (SSA) does not fund any political parties.
24 May 2016 - NW683
Shinn, Ms MR to ask the Minister of Communications
(1)(a) Which set-top box providers have been involved in the production of set top boxes (STBs) to the (i) Northern Cape and (ii) Free State up until 29 February 2016, (b) how many STBs has each company provided in each case? and (c) what amount has each company been paid up until the specified date for services rendered; (2) whether all of the STBs produced by the specified companies are Direct-to-Home STBs; if not, how many of the STBs produced are Digital Terrestrial Television STBs?
Reply:
(1) (a) Universal Service and Aceess Agency of South Africa (USAASA), has informed me that it has appointed three companies (BUA Africa, CZ Electronics and Leratadima) to produce and supply set-top boxes to the South African Post Offices accross the country, including the Northern Cape and the Free State.
(b) USAASA informed me that the companies provided STBs as follows:
(i) Northern Cape: BUA Africa provided 3,506 STBs; CZ Electronics provided 27,000 STBs; and Leratadima provided 150 STBs.
(ii) Free State: BUA Africa provided 1,400 STBs; CZ Electronics provided 16,000 STBs; and Leratadima provided 00 STBs.
(c) USAASA further informed me that BUA Africa did not receive any payments as their invoices came in late. Leratadima and CZ Electronics were paid R680,934.34 and R35,841,674.00 respectively.
(2) According to the Agency, not all produced STBs are Digital Terrestrial Television: 3,506 are DTH STBs and 27,150 are DTT STBs.
MR NN MUNZHELELE
DIRECTOR GENERAL [ACTING]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS
DATE:
MS AF MUTHAMBI (MP)
MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS
DATE
24 May 2016 - NW684
Shinn, Ms MR to ask the Minister of Communications
(a) Which companies have been providing the antennae for the set-top box roll-out in the (i) Northern Cape and (ii) Free State up until 29 February 2016 (b) how many antennae has each specified company provided to date? and (c) what amount has each specified company been paid to date?
Reply:
(a) The Universal Service and Access Agency of South Africa (USAASA), which is the entity charged with the responsibility of managing the procurement of set-top boxes, informed me that Ellies Industries, Temic Manufacturing and QEC Pty Ltd are the three companies appointed to provide DTT antennas in the Northern Cape and Free State as at 29 February 2016.
(b) The entity has informed me that Ellies Industries provided 15,680 DTH Antennas, Temic Manufacturing provided 9,640 DTT Antennas, and QEC Pty Ltd provided 3,100 DTT antennas.
(c) USAASA informed me that an amount of R8,834,200.00 was paid to Ellies Industries. QEC and Temic Manufacturing were paid R17,770.32 and R27,018.00 respectively.
MR NN MUNZHELELE
DIRECTOR GENERAL [ACTING]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS
DATE:
MS AF MUTHAMBI (MP)
MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS
DATE
24 May 2016 - NW1234
McLoughlin, Mr AR to ask the Minister of Water and Sanitation
(1)Whether, with reference to particular key commitments undertaken by her as a consequence of the assessment of her department by the Auditor-General in the 2014-15 financial year, the focus risk assessment has been discussed by her department’s top management; if not, why not; if so, (a)(i) when and (ii) where did such discussions take place, (b) who was present during the specified discussions and (c) what was the outcome of the discussions; (2) whetherher department’s audit committee produce a report on its monitoring of the risk assessment; if not, (a) why not and (b) when will this take place; (3) whether, with reference to the specified commitments, a structure incorporating the sanitation function has been established; if not, why not; if so, what (a) is the name of the specified structure, (b) are the full relevant details of the terms of reference of the specified structure, (c) sanitation-related work has the specified structure undertaken to date and (d) were the outcomes in each case; (4) whether, with reference to the specified commitments, a joint team comprising her department, the Auditor-General of South Africa and the National Treasury has met to commence its work towards addressing issues of concern; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Reply:
(1)(a)(i) My Department's Top Management discussed the Auditor-General (AG)’s report on the following dates, refer below:
- 13 October 2014;
- 23 February 2015; and
- 23 March 2015.
Furthermore the Risk Management Committee also discussed the AG's report on 13 October 2014.
(1)(a)(ii) The meeting took place in Pretoria.
(1)(b) The meeting was attended by members of Top Management and Risk Management.
(1)(c) The outcomes of the discussions was to mitigate risks as identified by the AG and to continue to improve the internal control environment.
(2) My Department’s audit committee report has been included in the annual report for 2014/15 financial year.
(3) No, the structure of the sanitation function remains as transferred from the Department of Human Settlements. The organisational structure of my Department is currently being reviewed in its entirety.
(4) A Steering Committee functions within my Department and is attended by Top Management, Internal Control, AG and National Treasury, which worked in tandem to resolve the issues raised during the AG Audit.
---00O00---
24 May 2016 - NW1422
Figg, Mr MJ to ask the Minister of Water and Sanitation
What (a) progress has been made to date on the Nooitgedacht Low Level Scheme in the Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality in the Eastern Cape, (b) amount has been spent to date and (c) is the expected date of completion of the specified scheme?
Reply:
(a) Phase 1 for the installation of the ±45 km pipe work and associated works was completed at a cost of R570 million. Phase 2 commenced in December 2014.
(b) Phase 2 expenditure for the 2014/15 Municipal financial year was R59.6 million. It is anticipated that the expenditure for 2015/16 (30 June 2016) will be R82 million. A further R40 million has been budgeted for the completion of Phase 2 during the 2016/17 financial year.
(c) Phase 2 is scheduled for completion by March 2017 with Phase 3 in December 2018.
---00O00---
23 May 2016 - NW1177
Volmink, Mr HC to ask the Minister of Finance
Has there been a review of the allocation of the equitable share to provinces for health services in the (a) 2013-14, (b) 2014-15 and (c) 2015-16 financial years; if not, (i) why not and (ii) does the National Treasury intend to make any changes to the equitable share formula; if so, what changes have been made to the equitable share formula in the specified financial years?
Reply:
Yes. The provincial equitable share formula is reviewed and updated annually with new data, where available. Periodic reviews of the formula are also undertaken.
The provincial share of nationally raised revenue is disbursed to provinces using the Provincial Equitable Share (PES) formula. The formula comprises of six components, of which health is one of them, weighted at 27 per cent.
The structure of the health component in the provincial equitable share was amended through a review undertaken in 2010/11. The revised health component, introduced from 2011/12, uses a risk-adjusted capitation index and output data from public hospitals to estimate each province’s share of the health component. These two subcomponents work together to balance the needs (risk-adjusted capitation) and demands (output component). Caseload data in the health component, which measures demand on the ground, changes from year to year and is updated every year with data from the national Department of Health’s Information System. However, the epidemiological landscape that drives the risk profile of a population in a province is unlikely to change from year to year and this subcomponent of the health component is updated on a 4 to 5 years interval cycle.
A review of the provincial equitable share formula is currently underway that will, amongst others, assess all data sources available for each of the components of the formula, including the health component. The outcomes of this review will be implemented in future medium term expenditure frameworks (MTEFs).
(i) Not applicable.
(ii) With respect to the health component, yearly data updates were applied for (a) 2013/14, (b) 2014/15 and (c) 2015/16 as follows:
- 2013/14
The health component for 2013/14 was updated with the 2011 General Household Survey, 2012 mid-year population estimates, data from the Council for Medical Schemes’ Risk Equalisation Fund, and District Health Information Services data for 2010/11 and 2011/12. The details of such updates are contained in pages 77 to 79 of the 2013 Division of Revenue Bill.
- 2014/15
The health component for 2014/15 was updated with the 2012 General Household Survey, 2013 mid-year population estimates, data from the Council for Medical Schemes’ Risk Equalisation Fund, and District Health Information Services data for 2011/12 and 2012/13. The details of such updates are contained in pages 77 to 78 of the 2014 Division of Revenue Bill.
- 2015/16
The health component for 2015/16 was updated with the 2013 General Household Survey, 2014 mid-year population estimates, data from the Council for Medical Schemes’ Risk Equalisation Fund, and District Health Information Services data for 2012/13 and 2013/14. The details of such updates are contained in pages 79 to 80 of the 2015 Division of Revenue Bill.
23 May 2016 - NW1364
Alberts, Mr ADW to ask the Minister of Transport
(a) How many (i) individuals and (ii) business concerns have been summoned by the SA National Roads Agency Ltd (Sanral) regarding their outstanding e-toll accounts, (b) what is the scale from the smallest to the largest amount being claimed, (c) what is the legal cause of each specified claim, (d)(i) which legal firms have been employed to institute legal steps and (ii) in terms of which process were they appointed, (e)(i) whether senior advocates will be appointed regarding any of the specified claims, (ii) who are the senior advocates and (iii) in terms of what process were they appointed and (f)(i) what do the legal costs currently amount to regarding the issuing of summonses and (ii) what amount has Sanral budgeted for settling the specified claims?
Reply:
(a) (i) 5449 individuals
(ii) 837 Corporate/businesses
(b) Smallest amount = R204.75
Largest amount = R10 551 548.16
(c) The Legal cause is Non Payment of Toll.
(d) (i) & (ii) From a Summons issue perspective Daly Attorneys were used. They form part of the Contractor’s business model with their sub-contractors.
Werksmans Inc. is on a retainer as Sanral’s attorneys of record related to e-Toll matters. A due SCM process was followed in their initial appointment.
(e) (i) Senior advocates may be appointed depending on the specifics of the defences offered for specified claims. However, no matter has reached a stage where the particular defences are known.
(ii) (iii) The appointment of senior advocates depends on the legal matters to be argued and the availability of a particular senior advocate.
(f) (i) There are fixed costs applicable to the drafting of summonses, costs of the court and sheriff costs. (ii) There is no specific budget for legal costs. SANRAL has a general budget for legal costs. Furthermore, depending on the particular process, legal costs are determined by the courts and if a defendant found guilty, the costs are carried by the defendant.
23 May 2016 - NW940
Brauteseth, Mr TJ to ask the Minister of Mineral Resources
Has (a) he and/or (b) his Deputy Minister ever (i) met with any (aa) member, (bb) employee and/or (cc) close associate of the Gupta family and/or (ii) attended any meeting with the specified persons (aa) at the Gupta’s Saxonwold Estate in Johannesburg or (bb) anywhere else since taking office; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, in each specified case, (aaa) what are the names of the persons who were present at each meeting, (bbb)(aaaa) when and (bbbb) where did each such meeting take place and (ccc) what was the purpose of each specified meeting?
Reply:
The Minister has not met with any member, nor close associate of the Guptas. He has also not attended a meeting with a specified person at the Gupta’s Saxonworld Estate in Johannesburg.
23 May 2016 - NW971
James, Dr WG to ask the Minister of Human Settlements
(1)How many houses were built by her department in the Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality in the Eastern Cape in the (a) second and (b) third quarters of the 2015-16 financial year; (2) with reference to the R500 million budget allocation from the National Treasury to the specified municipality (a) how many houses will be built, (b) by what date and (c) what are the further relevant details of this funding with regard to housing; (3) whether any of the specified funds will be used for rectification purposes; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details; (4) what are the details of any monies to be used outside of the specified municipality for the building of the specified houses?
Reply:
(1) The Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality constructed 1219 new houses, serviced 139 stands with water and sanitation and rectified 1561 houses during the 2015/16 financial year.
As far as rectification is concerned, it is now policy that my Department will no longer rectify any houses using its funds. A directive in this regard as been issued to all Provincial Human Settlements Departments that no funding from the Human Settlements Development Grant may be utilised for rectification. Any house that has defaults is the responsibility of the National Home Builders Registration Council (NHBRC), which is responsible to identify the contractor and ensure that they rectify the shoddy work at their own cost.
(a) 198 houses/units were built during the second quarter of 2015/16 financial year in the Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality, Eastern Cape.
(b) 215 houses/units were built during the third quarter of 2015/16 financial year in the Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality, Eastern Cape.
(2) An additional R500m was allocated to the Eastern Cape Provinces by the National Department and was disbursed as follows:
(a) R122m to Housing Development Agency which was appointed as the implementing agent for all new developments in the municipality;
(b) R46,5m for projects to be completed in the municipality by the Eastern Cape Department of Human Settlements – ECDOHS;
(c) R50,3m to the Municipality to complete current running projects (R50, 3m);
(d) R95m to the Revolving Fund of municipality as a reimbursement for bridge financing to fund housing construction;
(e) R186,2 to fund project commitments in the Eastern Cape other than Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality.
(3) The funds expended on rectification during the year under review were funded from the original Human Settlement Development Grant allocation to the Eastern Cape for 2015-16 financial year.
(4) An amount of R186, 2 m was spent on subsidised housing construction in the Eastern Cape other than in the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality, from additional R500m allocation.
23 May 2016 - NW872
Groenewald, Dr PJ to ask the Minister of Finance
(1)Whether South African Airways (SAA) allocated any sponsorship in the financial years (a) 2013-14, (b) 2014-15 and (c) 2015-16; if so, (i) to whom, (ii) for what amount, (iii) for which period and (iv) what the activity was in each case in respect of each financial year; (2) whether he was consulted in advance regarding the announcement that SAA would sponsor Bafana Bafana; if so, on what grounds he approved this, in the light of the savings measures that were announced for the financial year 2016-17; (3) what the full sponsorship of SAA to Bafana Bafana comprises; (4) whether he will make an announcement about the matter?
Reply:
1. Yes. According to South African Airways, their sponsorships in the financial years (a) 2013-14, (b) 2014-15 and (c) 2015-16 were as following (all these sponsorships were approved in accordance with the company’s delegation of authority requirements and followed an internal approval process which included the approval of a business case):
Sponsorship Property |
Right Holder |
Value |
Period |
Springboks |
SA Rugby |
R22.5m per annum |
2013-14 |
SA Olympic Teams |
SASCOC |
R6m per annum |
2014-15 |
Springboks |
SA Rugby |
R22.5m per annum |
2014-15 |
SA Olympic Teams |
SASCOC |
R6m per annum |
2015-16 |
Springboks |
SA Rugby |
R22.5 per annun |
2015-16 |
Miss South Africa |
Sun International |
R594k |
2015-16 |
World Routes |
UBM |
R1.5m |
2015-16 |
NBA Africa Games |
NBA Africa |
R1.3m |
2015-16 |
International Jazz Extravaganza |
Teacup Projects Proprietary Limited |
R1.1m |
2015-16 |
Notes:
- The SA Rugby sponsorship was a four (4) year agreement that ended in on 31 December 2015
- The SASCOC sponsorship is a three (3) year agreement that expires in March 2017
- All other sponsorship listed above with the exception of SA Rugby and SASCOC were agreements reviewed annually
- All SAA sponsorships including the ones listed above, are offered strictly on Value-In-Kind (VIK) basis with no outlay of cash. The sponsored parties are liable for airport taxes.
2. There is no mandatory provisions in the cost containment measures (National Treasury Instruction 01 of 2013/14) prohibiting sponsorships although accounting authorities were required to implement measures to contain operational costs and eliminate all non-essential expenditure. SAA is only required to obtain the Minister’s approval for significant transactions outlined in terms of Section 54(2) of the PFMA.
3. According to SAA, the Bafana Bafana sponsorship is valued at R110m in value in kind over a five (5) year period.
4. The Minister does not intend to make an announcement on this matter as SAA announces and accounts for all its sponsorships.
Nonetheless, prudence is required in exercising financial authority during times of financial constraints.
23 May 2016 - NW1282
De Freitas, Mr MS to ask the Minister of Transport
(a) Why are the contact names and details on her department’s website outdated (b) When will they be updated, (c) Whose responsibility is it to update the specified details and (d) What mechanisms and processes are in place to ensure that the specified information is always up-to-date in the future?
Reply:
a) The process of updating our website is underway including Contact us page. We have appointed an Online Media Service personnel to deal with it
b) The process is already underway and the Online Media Personnel is working on it
c) Its Communications Directorate to update content that goes on the Website
d) Online Media Service will be working with all stakeholders to collect information and update the website
23 May 2016 - NW815
Kopane, Ms SP to ask the Minister of Public Works
What criteria have been put in place to decide on the proportional allocation of the buildings owned by his department to state (a) departments and (b) organs for rent?
Reply:
The Minister of Public Works
(a) User Departments’ accommodation requirements differ in size and type and are informed by User Asset Management Plans (U-AMPs) for new requirements and/or ad hoc requests. The decision on the allocation of State-owned property to meet User requirements is also informed, among others, by: an assessment of the type of service being rendered by the client department; the fitness for purpose of the building; the functionality of the building; and the geographic location of the building.
The Department of Public Works (DPW) is further guided by the Space Planning Norms and Standards for Office Accommodation Use by Organs of State (Government Gazette No. 27985, 2 September 2005) to determine the appropriate space requirements for allocation.
(b) In the main, immovable assets under the custodianship of the DPW are primarily intended for the use of national User-Departments. Where assets are surplus to its needs, the DPW engages with other organs and custodians in the national, provincial and local spheres following the application of the above-mentioned criteria. Where there is no take-up within the Government sector, the Department may elect to lease out surplus properties to the private sector.
________________________________________________________________________
23 May 2016 - NW972
James, Ms LV to ask the Minister of Human Settlements
(1)How many government subsidised houses currently require rectification in the Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality in the Eastern Cape; (2) (a) how many government subsidised houses were rectified in the specified municipality (i) in the (aa) 2011-12, (bb) 2012-13, (cc) 2013-14 and (dd) 2014-15 financial years and (ii) since 1 April 2015 and (b) what plans does her department have to limit the need for rectification in the specified municipality?
Reply:
(1) Five thousand four hundred and sixty five (5 465) houses in the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality in the Eastern Cape require rectification.
(2) (a)(i)(aa) to (cc) From 2011 to 2014 a total of 28 261 housing units were rectified by the Provincial Department and/or Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality;
(dd) In 2014/15, a total number of 2 048 units were rectified by the Provincial Department and/or Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality;
(ii) Since 1st April 2015, a total of 1 561units were rectified; and
(b) As far as rectification is concerned, it is now policy that my Department will no longer rectify any houses using its funds. A directive in this regard was issued in 2015 to all Provincial Human Settlements Departments that no funding from the Human Settlements Development Grant may be utilised for rectification. Where defects and poor workmanship are identified, they remain the responsibility of the Province, Municipality and/or the Developer to take relevant remedial action against the contractor and enforce repairs at the cost of the contractor or developer.
The Honourable member is also referred my speech to the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) on 12 May 2015 during the Policy Debate on the budget of my Department. I indicated,
“We are no longer rectifying houses using our budget. Any house that has defaults is the responsibility of the NHBRC, which is responsible to identify the contractor and ensure that they rectify the shoddy work at their own cost. The money currently used on rectification can and will be used in building more houses”.
In order to limit the need to rectify houses, Government established the National Home Builders Registration (NHBRC). Its mandate is to ensure that all contractors who undertake the construction of a subsidised house are registered with the NHBRC and the requirement for registration, amongst others, is that they comply with all minimum norms and standards and expertise to construct a house.
In addition, the National Department conducts structured project-level monitoring on a quarterly basis in all nine Provinces for verification of delivery. During these, the quality of construction is also observed and reported. I also recently met with contractors involved in the housing subsidy market to address challenges and to emphasize amongst other the importance of quality workmanship.
23 May 2016 - NW1184
Ollis, Mr IM to ask the Minister of Police
(1)Whether the case opened by the National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac) into financial irregularities and alleged corruption involving certain persons (names furnished), following the findings of a forensic report completed in November 2012, has been finalised; if not, has it been closed; (2) (a) who has been interviewed during the investigation of the specified case, (b) what findings were made in the specified case, (c) what charges, if any, were laid against any person and (d) when will the specified case be finalised; (3) whether any person was (a) arrested and/or (b) prosecuted in this regard; if not, (i) why not in each case and (ii) when will the implicated persons be prosecuted; if so, what are the relevant details in each case; (4) whether any feedback was given to (a) Nedlac and/or (b) him regarding the results of the specified investigation; if so, in each case, (i) when was the feedback given and (ii) what was the feedback?
Reply:
(1) Yes, a case docket was opened by the National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac). The matter is still under investigation and is being investigated by the Anti-Corruption Task Team (ACTT), a subcomponent of the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI).
(2)(a) Witnesses who were involved in the day-to-day running of Nedlac were interviewed.
(2)(b) The case is under investigation.
(2)(c) Allegations of fraud are being investigated.
(2)(d) The matter will be finalised as soon as all the prosecutor’s instructions have been dealt with.
(3)(a) No arrests have been made yet.
(3)(b) No person has been prosecuted yet.
(3)(b)(i) The case is still under investigation.
(3)(b)(ii) When the investigation and the case is finalised in court.
(4)(a) A progress report/feedback has been given to Nedlac.
(4)(b)(i) On 2016-03-08.
(4)(b)(ii) Feedback given was that the matter was still under investigation and further particulars were requested from Nedlac.
23 May 2016 - NW1201
Redelinghuys, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Police
(1)Whether a certain person (name and details furnished) has been declared medically unfit; if so, (a) when and (b) what are the further relevant details; (2) whether the specified person’s pension has been paid out; if not, (a) why not and (b) when is this expected to be finalised; (3) whether the specified person’s (a) medical aid and (b) pension benefits were suspended at any stage (i) during and/or (ii) after employment by the SA Police Service; if so, (aa) why and (bb) what are the further relevant details; (4) who is responsible for processing the specified person’s pension pay-out; (5) whether any case of negligence is being investigated with regard to the non-payment of the specified person’s pension pay-out; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Reply:
(1)(a) Yes, on 31 March 2015.
(1)(b) On grounds of medical conditions. The member was informed in writing to submit a full set of the correctly completed exit documents to the South African Police Service.
(2)(a) No. The member’s exit documents are still at the Government Pension Administration Agency (GPAA) for further processing of pension payout.
(2)(b) According to the rules of the pension fund, pension monies will be paid out within 60 days from the date after the day on which GPAA received exit documents from SAPS (11 March 2016). Expected finalization/payment date is before or on 8 June 2016.
(3)(a) No. According to Polmed records, the member still has medical aid cover, and her medical aid benefits were never suspended at any stage.
(b)(i)&(ii) The member’s pension benefits were suspended during the period 1 April 2007 until 30 September 2007.
(aa)&(bb) The member was on leave without pay for the period 1 April 2007 to 30 September 2007 which emanated from the disapproval of temporary incapacity leave by the Health Risk Manager.
Upon receipt of supporting medical report from the member, SAPS reconsidered the representation and converted the leave without pay for the period 1 April 2007 to 30 September 2007 into temporary incapacity leave.
The member was reimbursed for the period of leave without pay on 24 February 2014. The pension contribution to GPAA was deducted from the reimbursement and paid to GPAA for the said period.
(4) SAPS is responsible for processing Ill-Health Retirement and the Government Pension Administration Agency (GPAA) is responsible for pension payout.
(5) No case of negligence is being investigated.
No negligence was found on the side of SAPS but rather on the side of the member due to the following reasons:
- The member submitted documents of poor quality, e.g. the decree of divorce was certified more than once.
- The member’s lawyer refused to submit the decree of divorce that was duly certified.
23 May 2016 - NW1091
Kohler-Barnard, Ms D to ask the Ms D Kohler
(1) What is the total number of (a) fridges, (b) sets of curtains (c) couches, (d) tables and (e) chairs that were replaced at the Parliamentary villages since 1 April 2015; (2) what are the (a) names and (b) addresses of the (i) organisations and (ii) entities that the furniture was donated to; (3) what is the physical address of the department’s central storage warehouse from where furniture is distributed?
Reply:
The Minister of Public Works
(1) No (a) fridges, (b) curtains, (c) couches, (d) tables and (e) chairs were replaced at the Parliamentary villages since 01 April 2015.
(2) (a) and (b) (i) and (ii) and (3) fall away.
23 May 2016 - NW1247
Maynier, Mr D to ask the Minister of Finance
Whether the Financial Intelligence Centre (a) has conducted or (b) is conducting an investigation into (i) allegations of money laundering and (ii) any other specified matter in respect of (aa) members of the Gupta family and/or (bb) known close associates of the Gupta family; if not, in each specified case, why not; if so, in each specified case, what are the relevant details?
Reply:
The short answer is that the Financial Intelligence Centre (FIC) is not an “investigating authority”, and is therefore not mandated to undertake nor conduct investigations to gather evidence to prove criminal conduct in a prosecution.
Legal provisions in the Financial Intelligence Centre Act, Act No 38 of 2001 (the FIC Act), prevent the FIC from disclosing any information on what matters the FIC may be working on or not.
In particular, the FIC Act contains strict limitations to protect the confidentiality of reporters, on the disclosure of information reported to it, information at its disposal and of details of its activities concerning such information (section 29 read with section 53, and sections 40 and 41 read with section 60, of the FIC Act).
The FIC is therefore not able to provide the information requested.
The way the Honourable Member has phrased this Question 1247, reflects certain misunderstandings of the FIC Act and how the FIC is called upon to lawfully administer the FIC Act, which I need to clarify, and do so below, to ensure the Honourable Member is better informed.
The FIC Act requires designated financial and other institutions to establish and verify the identities of their customers, and maintain related records of their customers and their transactions. The FIC Act also requires designated institutions to report certain information, such as large cash transactions (R25 000 and above) and suspicious and unusual transactions to the FIC. Importantly, an institution which reports a suspicious or unusual transaction to the FIC may continue with the reported transaction(s) unless instructed by the FIC not to do so.
The FIC Act currently does not require a financial institution to pay special attention to any category of customers. The FIC Act also does not contain any provisions which require financial institutions to apply a risk-based approach to the manner in which they manage customer relationships. In this respect the FIC Act is not in line with current international standards on measures to combat money laundering and terrorist financing (the Recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force (the FATF)).
These FATF standards require, among others, that financial institutions understand the risks associated with different business relationships and apply enhanced due diligence where they perceive higher risk of money laundering or terrorist financing. Enhanced due diligence implies more diligent identification and verification measures and stricter monitoring of customers’ transaction activities.
Parliament is currently considering amendments to the FIC Act to give effect to the requirements of the international standards. These requirements include the application by financial institutions of a risk-based approach to customer due diligence and applying additional due diligence to PEPs (described in the amendments as Persons in Prominent Positions).
I re-affirm that the FIC does not itself undertake “investigations” with a view to gather evidence to prove criminal conduct in a prosecution.
Instead, the FIC analyses information reported to it and at its disposal, and supplies financial intelligence on financial transactions of reported persons or entities, but not evidence, to competent authorities, such as investigating law enforcement authorities, statutory supervisory bodies and state security agencies, to facilitate the administration and enforcement of the laws of the Republic.
These competent authorities, as lawful recipients of FIC issued financial intelligence, in turn undertake independent criminal investigations, supervisory inspections, or other actions, respectively, within their respective legal mandates.
Accordingly, the sharing of information by the FIC with other competent authorities enables them to better discharge their respective responsibilities in the administration of the criminal justice system, the financial and non-financial sector regulatory systems, and the protection of national security, in the Republic.
The FIC Act contains strict limitations on the disclosure by the FIC of information at its disposal. This also applies to disclosure by the FIC of details of its activities concerning such information. Section 29(4) of the FIC Act provides that:
“No person who knows or suspects that a report has been or is to be made in terms of this section may disclose that knowledge or suspicion or any information regarding the contents or suspected contents of any such report to any other person, including the person in respect of whom the report is or is to be made, otherwise than-
(a) within the scope of that person’s powers and duties in terms of any legislation;
(b) for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act;
(c) for the purpose of legal proceedings, including any proceedings before a judge in chambers; or
(d) in terms of an order of court.”
Contravention of this provision is an offence punishable by imprisonment for 15 years or to a fine not exceeding R100 million under section 53 read with section 68 of the FIC Act.
Moreover, section 40(1) of the FIC Act restricts the FIC to disclosing information under its control:
“(a) to an investigating authority inside the Republic, the South African Revenue Service and the intelligence services, which may be provided with such information-
(i) on the written authority of an authorised officer if the authorised officer reasonably believes such information is required to investigate suspected unlawful activity; or
(ii) at the initiative of the Centre, if the Centre reasonably believes such information is required to investigate suspected unlawful activity;
(b) to an entity outside the Republic performing similar functions to those of the Centre, or an investigating authority outside the Republic which may, at the initiative of the Centre or on written request, obtain information which the Centre reasonably believes is relevant to the identification of the proceeds of unlawful activities or the combating of money laundering or financing of terrorist and related activities or similar offences in the country in which that entity is established;
(c) to an accountable institution or reporting institution which or any other person who may, at the initiative of the Centre or on written request, be provided with information regarding the steps taken by the Centre in connection with transactions reported by such accountable institution, reporting institution or person, unless the Centre reasonably believes that disclosure to such accountable institution, reporting institution or person of the information requested could-
(i) inhibit the achievement of the Centre’s objectives or the performance of its functions, or the achievement of the objectives or the performance of the functions of another organ of state; or
(ii) prejudice the rights of any person;
(d) to a supervisory body, which may at the initiative of the Centre or on written request be provided with information which the Centre reasonably believes is relevant to the exercise by that supervisory body of its powers or performance by it of its functions in relation to an accountable institution
(e) in terms of an order of a court; or
(f) in terms of other national legislation.”
In terms of section 41 of the FIC Act:
“No person may disclose confidential information held by or obtained from the Centre except-
(a) within the scope of that person’s powers and duties in terms of any legislation;
(b) for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act;
(c) with the permission of the Centre;
(d) for the purpose of legal proceedings, including any proceedings before a judge in chambers; or
(e) in terms of an order of court.”
Contravention of these two provisions (sections 40 and 41) is an offence and punishable by imprisonment for 15 years or to a fine not exceeding R100 million under section 60 read with section 68 of the FIC Act.
Confirmation or denial by the FIC in the public domain on whether the FIC has received or disclosed any information relating to a particular person or entity to another competent authority, or taken any other action related to such information would amount to a contravention of the above-mentioned provisions of the FIC Act and is therefore not legally permissible.
Moreover, since the FIC’s mandate requires it to assist and work in collaboration with other competent authorities in any given criminal investigation or supervisory inspection or action, any public disclosure of information relating to a specific person or entity who may be the subject of an investigation, supervisory inspection, or details of an operation being conducted by such competent authorities,. It would therefore be irresponsible for the FIC to comment in public on operational matters in which the FIC may or may not be involved. is likely to have a serious detrimental impact on the investigation, inspection or operation.
In conclusion, as Minister of Finance I therefore cannot confirm or deny whether the FIC has information relating to the specific persons or entities previously mentioned at its disposal, nor whether the FIC has or has not made information available to law enforcement authorities in support of investigations of allegations of money laundering against the specific persons or entities.
23 May 2016 - NW1090
Kohler-Barnard, Ms D to ask the Minister of Public Works
(1) (a) What number of his department’s properties have been found to be illegally occupied currently and (b) by whom are these properties illegally occupied; (2) Have any persons involved persons involved in the illegal occupation of the specified properties been criminally charged; if so, how many persons were criminally charged?
Reply:
The Minister of Public Works
1. (a) To date, 1 287 properties have been confirmed as illegally occupied.
Below is a summary of instances of unlawful occupation:
Province |
Squatters |
Mud houses |
Private houses/ commercial buildings |
Total number of illegally occupied properties |
KwaZulu Natal |
128 |
301 |
110 |
539 |
Eastern Cape |
20 |
27 |
75 |
122 |
Gauteng |
83 |
0 |
66 |
149 |
Limpopo |
3 |
0 |
29 |
32 |
Northern Cape |
16 |
0 |
47 |
63 |
Western Cape |
8 |
0 |
119 |
127 |
North West |
31 |
0 |
104 |
120 |
Free State |
8 |
1 |
17 |
26 |
Mpumalanga |
31 |
10 |
68 |
109 |
Total number of illegally occupied properties |
313 |
339 |
635 |
1 287 |
(b) 313 properties are occupied by squatters who have built temporary (squatter camps) residences on the properties. 339 properties are occupied by communities that have built mud structures on the land. 635 properties are occupied by private sector commercial businesses and are being used either as private residences or business premises.
(2) To date, none of the above listed matters listed matters have been referred for criminal investigation. The Department of Public Works is currently following the civil route in order to resolve disputes.
________________________________________________________________________
23 May 2016 - NW1199
Redelinghuys, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Police
(a) Which SA Police Service stations currently serve Ward 24 in the City of Tshwane, (b) what are the boundaries of the area of operation of each of the specified police stations and (c)(i) how many (aa) police officers, (bb) officials who are employed in terms of the Public Service Act, Act 103 of 1994, and (cc) operational vehicles are at each of the specified stations and (ii) what is the breakdown in terms of the (aa) rank of each specified officer and official and (bb) division each specified officer and official belongs to?
Reply:
- Loate and Dube police stations.
(b) A map indicating the boundaries is attached as per Annexure A.
(c)(i)
(c)(i)(aa) Police Act Employees |
(c)(i)(bb) Public Service Act Employees |
|
Dube |
41 |
9 |
Loate |
118 |
26 |
(c)(ii)(aa) and (bb) Breakdown per function and salary level is attached as per Annexure B.
(c)(i)(cc) Operational vehicles at Dube police station:
Operational vehicles at Dube police station |
|
Sectors |
6 |
Detective Service |
5 |
Client Service Centre |
6 |
Crime Prevention |
2 |
Total operational vehicles |
19 |
Operational vehicles at Loate police station |
|
Detective Service |
16 |
Client Service Centre |
5 |
Crime Prevention |
15 |
Total operational vehicles |
36 |
23 May 2016 - NW1281
De Freitas, Mr MS to ask the Minister of Transport
(1)Whether any audits have been undertaken to determine how many ghost workers are on the books of (a) her department and (b) each entity reporting to her in the (i) 2011-12, (ii) 2012-13, (iii) 2013-14, (iv) 2014-15 and (v) 2015-16 financial years; if not, (aa) why not and (bb) when, if at all, will such audits be undertaken; if so, (2) in each case, (a) when were such audits undertaken, (b) by whom, (c) what were the outcomes, (d) what are the reasons for the specified phenomenon, (e) what costs were incurred, (f) how were guilty parties handled and (g) what is (i) her department and (ii) each entity reporting to her doing with the information revealed in the specified audits?
Reply:
Department
(a) An audit on possible existence of ghost employees in the Department of Transport was undertaken by the Inhouse internal audit activity in the 2011/12 financial year, with a follow-up audit in the 2012/13 financial year.
(b) The results of both full-scale and follow-up audits revealed that there were no ghost employees in the payroll system (PERSAL) of the Department of Transport.
The issue of ghost employees is indicated as a high risk in the fraud risk register of the Department and is regularly and closely monitored by the relevant risk owners
Airports Company South Africa SOC Limited (ACSA)
1.(b) The Airports Company South Africa has conducted audits to establish whether any “ghost workers” existed on the payroll for the financial years mentioned above, 2011 to 2016.
(i) Yes, an audit was conducted to determine how many ghost workers with the Company in the 2011-12 financial year.
(ii) Yes, an audit was conducted to determine how many ghost workers with the Company in the 2012-13 financial year.
(iii) Yes, an audit was conducted to determine how many ghost workers with the Company in the 2013-14 financial year.
(iv) Yes, an audit was conducted to determine how many ghost workers with the Company in the 2014-15 financial year.
(v) Yes, an audit was conducted to determine how many ghost workers with the Company in the 2015-16 financial year.
2. (a) Audits have been conducted by Internal Audit and External Auditors for the period 2011 to 2014.
(b) Price Waterhouse Coopers (PWC) and Sizwe Ntsaluba Gobodo (SNG) for the period 2011 to 2014. The Auditor General of SA (AGSA) audited for the period 2015 to 2016.
(c) There were no findings raised related to the existence of “ghost workers”.
(d) – (f) Please see response to (c) above.
Air Traffic and Navigation Services SOC Limited (ATNS)
1. As part of the part of the annual Internal Financial Controls audit, the payroll process is subject to audit annually with audit procedures applied to detect ghost employees.
(b) (i) 2011-12
(ii) 2012-13
(iii) 2013-14
(iv) 2014-15
(v) 2015-16
(aa) the audits are done annually.
(bb) the audits are done annually.
2. The audits are undertaken annually between November and February by internal audit and further by external auditors. There have been no ghost employees found through audit procedures over the years.
(a) The audits are done annually.
(b) Both ATNS internal audit and external audit.
(c) No ghost employees were found.
(d) None of the above.
(e) None of the above.
(f) None of the above.
(g) None of the above.
South African Civil Aviation Authority (SACAA)
1. Yes (a) N/A
(b) the SACAA’s Internal Audit division conducted ghost employee checks/reviews through payroll audits which are performed annually.
(i) No audit was conducted in 2011-12,
(ii) Audits were conducted in 2012-13,
(iii) and 2013-14, (iv) and in 2014-15.
(v) The audit for 2015-16 has not taken place yet.
(aa) None of the above
(bb) 2015-16 audit is scheduled to take place during the 2016-17 FY.
2. (a) In each case the audits are conducted after the end of the financial year.
(b) The audits are carried out by the Internal Audit division using the Computer Assisted Audit Techniques (CAATs) to identify any anomalies within the payroll system.
(c) For the audits conducted in 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 NO ghost employees were identified.
(d) None of the above.
(e) None of the above.
(f) None of the above.
(g) None of the above.
(i) None of the above.
(ii) No incidences were revealed by the audits in the SACAA.
Cross-Border Road Transport Agency (CBRTA)
(1) (b) The C-BRTA has not undertaken any audits specifically to determine how many ghost workers are on the books on any of the given financial years i.e. 2011-12, (ii) 2012-13, (iii) 2013-14, (iv) 2014-15 and (v) 2015-16. However, the Agency has put internal control measures in place to ensure that only valid employees are paid and therefore mitigating against the risk of paying ghost employees. Among others, these internal control measures include but are not limited to:
- Input on certain payroll transactions by one employee (a Senior Administrative Officer), where approval for processing is then provided by the Payroll Specialist;
- The review of the monthly payroll by another employee at Senior Manager level, against all input documentation; and
- The approval of Payroll for payment after a further review by the Executive Manager.
Furthermore, the periodic internal and annual external audits of the entity are undertaken with payroll being one of the specific audit items on the programme. None of these audits have uncovered any ghost workers in the reporting periods in question. (aa) The Agency has not seen the need to conduct these audits because the internal control processes in place have been found to be adequate and the risk of paying ghost employees is mitigated.
(bb) While there are no specific audits conducted on the ghost employees, the following internal auditors have conducted payroll audits and have found the controls within payroll environment to be effective:
Financial year |
Internal auditors |
External auditors |
2011-12 |
IA Professionals and Related Services |
Auditor General South Africa |
2012-13 |
Nkonki |
Auditor General South Africa |
2013-14 |
Nkonki |
Auditor General South Africa |
2014-15 |
Price Waterhouse Coopers |
Auditor General South Africa |
2015-16 |
Price Waterhouse Coopers |
Auditor General South Africa |
Road Accident Fund (RAF)
1. (b) To determine whether any ghost workers are on the books of the Road Accident Fund (RAF), the Auditor-General of South Africa (AGSA), as part of its annual audit of the RAF, performs an audit to identify possible ghost employees, whilst the RAF performs: a 100% data analytics review, and on a sample basis, verification of employees on the SAP system against the physical information on personnel files; internal financial control reviews, on a sample basis, to ensure that employees who resigned, or who were dismissed, are timeously terminated on the SAP system; and, further ad hoc audits.
The number of respective audits totalled (i) 1 audit in the 2011-12, (ii) 2 audits in the 2012-13, (iii) 6 audits in the 2013-14, (iv) 6 audits in the 2014-15 financial years;
(aa) this question is not applicable as audits were undertaken during the aforementioned periods, (bb) the annual and other regular audits referred to in 1(b) will continue in future;
(2) In each case the audits -
(a) were undertaken: |
(b) by: |
following the RAF’s year-end at 31 March 2011, 31 March 2012, 31 March 2013, and 31 March 2014, as part of the statutory annual audit, |
AGSA, |
on 24 and 25 November 2011, in respect of an ad hoc 100% physical head count audit, |
RAF Internal Audit Department, |
during June 2013, September 2013, November 2013, March 2014, April 2014, July 2014, November 2014, and March 2015, as part of the internal financial control reviews, |
RAF Internal Audit Department, |
during April 2013 and April 2014, as part of the data analytics review, |
RAF Internal Audit Department, |
(c) no ghost employees were identified, therefore questions (d), (e), (f), and (g)(ii) are not applicable to the RAF.
Road Traffic Management Corporation (RTMC)
1. There hasn’t been any ghost employees for the period 2011/2012 – 2014/2015
The latest physical verification / audit was done during September 2015. In this verification process/ audit no ghost employees identified.
The 2015/2016 verification is still under progress, the results of which will be available once done.
2. (a) The latest verification was done during September and October 2015 – this verification relates to the 2014/2015 financial year.
(b) The verification for 2014/2015 financial year was done by the Payroll unit of the RTMC
(c) The outcome for the 2014/2015 verification dictates that there were no ghost employees at RTMC.
(d) Not Applicable as there was no ghost employees.
(e) There was no cost incurred for the 2014/2015 verification as the exercise was done internally by Payroll unit of the RTMC. The 2015/2016 verification process has not been completed, but were can indicate that there are no amounts to be incurred as the exercise is done internally by RTMC Payroll.
(f) Not Applicable as there was no ghost employees
(g) Not Applicable as there was no ghost employees
Road Traffic Infringement Agency (RTIA)
1. Yes, audits have been undertaken by the Road Traffic Infringement Agency in (i) 2011-12, (ii) 2012-13, (iii) 2013-14, (iv) 2014-15 and 2015-16 Financial years.
(aa) Not Applicable
(bb) Not Applicable
2. (a) 2011/12 - ; 2012/13 – 01 May 2013; 2013/14 – 01 May 2015; 2014/15 – 05 May 2015; 2015/16 – 30 April 2016.
(b) Auditor General, SEMA/IRS and Audit & Risk Management Solutions
(c) No ghost employees were found
(d) Internal controls are in place and are reviewed periodically
(e) Payroll audits are conducted as part of Auditor General’s scope for audit. Internal audit does the payroll audit as part of their annual systems audit.
(f) Not Applicable
(g) Not Applicable
South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL)
1. Yes, audits have been undertaken by the Road Traffic Infringement Agency in (i) 2011-12, (ii) 2012-13, (iii) 2013-14, (iv) 2014-15 and 2015-16 Financial years.
(aa) Not Applicable
(bb) Not Applicable
2. (a) 2011/12 - ; 2012/13 – 01 May 2013; 2013/14 – 01 May 2015; 2014/15 – 05 May 2015; 2015/16 – 30 April 2016.
(b) Auditor General South Africa
(c) No ghost employees were found
(d) Internal controls are in place and AGSA performs on audit on an annual basis verifying each employees
(e) Payroll audits are conducted as part of Auditor General’s scope for audit.
(f) Not Applicable
(g) Not Applicable
Ports Regulator of South Africa (PRSA)
- (b) There were no special audits undertaken by the Ports Regulator since both the internal and external auditors perform employee verification for all employees taking into account the fact that the Ports Regulator employs only 17 employees. The verifications are done annually and did take place in (i) 2011/12, (ii) 2012/13, 2013/14, (iv) 2014/15 and (v) 2015/16. (aa) N/A, (bb) N/A.
- (a) these audits were undertaken each year by (b) internal and external auditors and (c) there were no ghost employees found on the payroll. (d) Strict internal controls prevented this, (e) the audits were done as part of the annual audit (f) there were no guilty parties to be handled.
South African Maritime Safety Authority (SAMSA)
SAMSA has not undertaken audits on ghost workers as a separate audit exercises. However, the Auditor-General does verify the existence of employees on the SAMSA payroll during their audits. The AG has not identified any ghost worker on the SAMSA payroll during their previous audits.
Railway Safety Regulator (RSR)
The Human Resources and Payroll Audits are undertaken on a yearly basis by both the Internal Auditors as well as the Auditor-General and no audit findings for ghost employees were identified for the following financial years:
Financial Years |
Ghost Workers |
2011-2012 |
No audit findings for non-existing employees during the Payroll auditing |
2012-2013 |
No audit findings for non-existing employees during the Payroll auditing |
2013-2014 |
No audit findings for non-existing employees during the Payroll auditing |
2014-2015 |
No audit findings for non-existing employees during the Payroll auditing |
2015-2016 |
No audit findings for non-existing employees during the Payroll auditing |
Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA)
1. No audits have been undertaken to determine specifically how many ghost workers are on the books of PRASA in the financial years mentioned. PRASA Internal Audit Department performs Human Capital Management (HCM) audits, where the scope relates to the adequacy and effectiveness of HCM processes including:
- Policies and Procedures
- Staff Retention and Succession Planning, Scarce Skills Plans
- Overtime Management
- Leave Management, Productivity and Absenteeism
- Recruitment and Selection
- Terminations and Suspensions
- Salary increases and promotions
- Payroll
- Organisational structure and reporting lines
- Employee Wellness Programme
The Auditor General also performs audit on the HCM function as part of their annual year end audit. PRASA also undertakes monthly payroll reconciliations, and to date no discrepancies have been uncovered.
2. See (1) above.
23 May 2016 - NW1285
Shinn, Ms MR to ask the Minister of Telecommunications and Postal Services
(1)Has the Universal Service Access Agency of South Africa (USAASA) played any role in the planning of SA Connect; if not, (a) why not and (b) what role will USAASA play in the future planning and rollout of the programme; (2) (a) what is the estimated cost of (i) planning and (ii) rolling out (aa) Phase 1 and (bb) Phase 2 of SA Connect, (b) what is the detailed breakdown of how this funding will be spent in the (i) 2016-17, (ii) 2017-18 and (iii) 2018-19 financial years and (c) which budget allocation will the specified funds come from in each of the specified financial years?
Reply:
I have been advised by the Department as follows:-
1. No.
(a) The Department has engaged with USAASA to ensure alignment of the Broadband initiatives being funded through the USAF and SA Connect Phase 1 hence USAASA’s current and future plans are aligned with the SA Connect Phase 1 District Municipalities.
(b) The Department and USAASA will continue to engage to outline the agency roles on SA Connect implementation taking into consideration developments in the sector
2. (aa) (i)-(ii) The estimated cost for Phase1 of SA Connect is R6.56billion
(bb) (i) – (ii) The estimated cost for Phase2 of SA Connect is R67.4 billion
(b) (i)-(iii) Phase 1 detailed breakdown
Phase 1 Budget Allocation (Million) |
|||
2016/17 |
2017/18 |
2018/19 |
Total |
R 516.34 |
R 719. 52 |
R 720. 37 |
R6.56 Billion |
(i)- (iii) Phase 2 detailed breakdown
Phase 2 Budget Allocation (Million) |
|||
2016/17 |
2017/18 |
2018/19 |
Total |
R 823, 9 |
R 1, 557 |
R 2, 213 |
67.42 Billion |
(c) The funding for Phase 1 will come from Budget allocation MTEF 2016/-2018/19. No allocation for Phase 2
23 May 2016 - NW1287
Basson, Mr LJ to ask the Minister of Telecommunications and Postal Services
(1)What meetings of (a) the National ICT Forum and (b) each of its four forums have taken place since 1 October 2015, in each case indicating (i) dates, (ii) venues of these meetings, as well as (iii) agendas and (iv) records of decisions made at each meeting; (2) Which (a) reports and/or (b) initiatives have been instigated by any of the specified forums, in each case providing the relevant details including (i) plans of action and (ii) deadlines where applicable?
Reply:
I have been advised by the Department as follows:-
1. (a) Since 1 October 2015, the National ICT Forum has held a number of meetings through its various structures, which comprises of the Chairpersons Forum, Chamber meetings and Working Committees.
(b) (i) Meeting Dates:
-
-
- Chairpersons Forum – 30 November 2015, 11 March 2016 and 06 May 2016
- Economic Chamber – 3 March 2016
- Social Chamber – 27 November 2015 and 19 February 2016
- Governance and Security Chamber – 7 December 2015
- ICTs and Disability Chamber – 2 December 2015 and 17 March 2016
-
(ii) Venues:
- Chairpersons Forum – Director General’s Boardroom (Department)
- Economic Chamber – Blue Crane Boardroom (Department)
- Social Chamber – Blue Crane boardroom (Department)
- Governance and Security Chamber – Blue Crane Boardroom (Department)
- ICTs and Disability Chamber – Burgherspark Hotel (Pretoria)
(iii) Agendas:
Chairpersons Forum – Stakeholder Mobilization and Participation, Resource Mobilization, Draft Work Programmes of Chambers, National Workshop
Economic Chamber – ICT Skills, ICT SMMEs support, Electronic Manufacturing, Postal Sector and ICTs
- Social Chamber – e-Health, e-Education, e-Justice and e-Agriculture
- Governance and Security Chamber – e-Commerce, Internet Governance, Policy Mapping and Cyber Security.
- ICTs and Disability Chamber – ICT Assistive Devices, Access to Government websites, Access to Banking Services
(iv) Records of decisions:
- Chambers have developed their Terms of Reference and firmed up their structures
- Chambers have now resolved and are prepared draft Work Programmes which still need to
- be approved by the department
- The Chairpersons Forum agreed to convene a National Workshop to discuss and endorse
- the draft Work Programmes
(2)(a) Reports and (b) Initiatives
Initiatives that are coming out of the draft work programmes of the chambers include the following:
- Conduct a National ICT Skills Audit with relevant stakeholders
- Develop and implement a basic National e-Literacy Programme
- Facilitate creation of Creative Hubs for SMMEs in townships with relevant support
- Support development of ICT applications that will enable SMMEs to expand business opportunities
- Develop and implement a Cybersecurity Awareness programme
- To develop a National set of Principles/framework for Internet Governance in South Africa
- Establish/ or revive an Intergovernmental Forum on Internet Governance
- Create a cybersecurity Body of Knowledge for general access by South Africans
- Explore Youth Job Creation Programme focusing on cybersecurity awareness
- Facilitate engagements with relevant to improve access to banking services, government websites, employment, education and broadcasting for people with disabilities.
A National Workshop will be convened before the end of June 2016 to discuss and endorse the draft programmes of each Chamber. The workshop will also discuss resource mobilization for implementation of the work programme and timelines.
23 May 2016 - NW1359
Alberts, Mr ADW to ask the Minister of Transport
(1)(a)(i) How many road users as a percentage of the total average number of monthly road users and (ii) what exact number of road users have made use of the offer by the SA National Roads Agency Ltd (Sanral) to obtain a 60% discount on their e-toll accounts if they pay the specified accounts before 1 May 2016 and (b)(i) what sum total payments and (ii) what percentage of payments has been been made in accordance with the specified offer by (aa) individual road users and (bb) business concerns; (2) whether Sanral intends taking futher legal steps agains non-paying e-toll road users; if not, why not; if so, (a) whether the envisaged legal steps include criminal legal processes, (b) what will be the extent of that, (c) by which date this will happen and (d) what is the extent of the legal costs which has been budgeted for settling the claims?
Reply:
(1) (a)(i) & (ii) There are approximately 2.5 million distinct vehicles using the GFIP on a monthly basis. Approximately 1,45 million vehicles are currently registered or making payment. SANRAL received more than 600 000 enquiries on the less60% offer via the web or via inbound calls from the public. Of the 600 000, approximately 130 000 have settled their account or made arrangements to settle. There is however still work in progress related to the balance of the 600 000 users indicated above.
(b)(i) R136m discounted paid and payment agreements for a further R123m discounted entered into.
(ii) (aa) & (bb) – the system is not set up to distinguish between type of users.
(2) SANRAL is an agency of Government and must comply with the requirements of the PFMA. There is a legal obligation on users to pay toll at a toll plaza or tolling point. SANRAL is obliged to collect outstanding debts to Government in terms of the PFMA.
(a) The SANRAL Act allows for both civil and criminal legal processes. Both are available to SANRAL and the prosecuting authorities.
(b) The extent of these processes are determined by legislation
(c) The NPA already successfully prosecuted a person in 2015 for the non-payment of toll as well as fraud. Further cases are investigated. The issuing of civil summonses already commenced.
(d) We trust that the honourable member is not suggesting that due to legal costs, SANRAL should neglect its obligation to collect the debt owed as mandated in the PFMA. As the honourable member would appreciate the costs are dependent on the particular process, legal costs are determined by the courts.
23 May 2016 - NW869
Groenewald, Dr PJ to ask the Minister of Finance
(1)Whether the SA Airways still allows firearms handed in by passengers to be flown to their destination; if not, (a) when was the practice discontinued and (b) what is the reason for this; (2) whether he will make a statement about the matter?
Reply:
1. South African Airways has indicated that on all destinations they have stopped transporting fire-arms for passengers. Additional information is available on SAA’s webiste at http://www.flysaa.com/za/en/flyingSAA/baggage/firearms.html
2. The Minister does not intend to make an announcement on this matter.
23 May 2016 - NW1286
Basson, Mr LJ to ask the Minister of Telecommunications and Postal Services
(a) What steps have been taken to replace the three councillors who resigned from the National Broadband Advisory Council in 2015, (b) who is the current chair of the specified council and (c) what meetings has he had with the specified chairperson since taking office, in each case indicating (i) dates, (ii) venue and (iii) agenda of any specified meetings?
Reply:
(a) There have not been attempts to replace the Councillors. Minister met with the previous Chairperson and expressed the intention to change the structure of the Council to derive maximum value for all stakeholders.
(b) There is currently no designated Chairperson of the council.
(c) There has not been any meetings with the Chairperson.
23 May 2016 - NW1222
Filtane, Mr ML to ask the Minister of Police
Whether he is aware of the alleged irregularities (details furnished) at the Madeira Police Station in Mthatha, Eastern Cape; if not, will he institute an investigation into the alleged irregularities for the purposes of bringing a solution; if so, (a) what steps, if any, have been taken to resolve the specified irregularities, (b) what is the (i) progress and (ii) time frame of the specified steps and (c) what are the further relevant details?
Reply:
The Provincial Commissioner of the Eastern Cape was not aware of the alleged irregularities as contained in the attached statements to this Question in Parliament, which are viewed in a very serious light.
(a) Two (2) Senior Officers have been appointed to conduct an in-depth investigation into the alleged irregularities at Madeira Police Station with a view to take appropriate action against whoever might be implicated in such irregularities.
(b) The investigation will commence immediately and is envisaged to be finalized within twenty one (21) days.
(c) Progress will be reported in due course.
23 May 2016 - NW893
Ndlozi, Dr MQ to ask the Minister of Mineral Resources
(1)Has he earned any additional income from businesses, in particular businesses doing work for the Government, since his appointment as Minister; if so, (a) when, (b) how much did he earn, (c) from which businesses and (d) for what work;
Reply:
1. No. The Minister has not earned any additional income from doing business with government
a) N/A
b) N/A
c) N/A
d) N/A
(2) whether his (a) spouse, (b) children and (c) close family earned income from businesses, in particular businesses doing work for the Government, through his appointment as Minister; if so, in respect of each case, (i) when, (ii) how much did each earn, (iii) from which businesses and (iv) for what work? NW1019E
ANSWER
2. No family members of the Minister have earned incoming from doing business with government.
i) N/A
ii) N/A
iii) N/A
iv) N/A
Reply
Approved/not approved
Mr MJ Zwane, MP
Minister of Mineral Resources
Date Submitted:-………………/………………/2016
23 May 2016 - NW1284
Shinn, Ms MR to ask the Minister of Telecommunications and Postal Services
(a) what amount of the R1.2 billion allocated to broadband in his department’s Medium Term Expenditure Framework 2016-17 to 2018-19 financial years is allocated to SA Connect and (b) what is the detailed breakdown of items the specified allocation will be spent on in each of the specified financial years; 2) (a) what steps in line with the Public Finance Management Act, Act 1 of 1999, are being taken to select a lead agency for SA Connect, (b) what skills are required of the lead agency and (c) what documents, such as requests for proposals, have been published in this regard to invite private sector participation in the (i) planning, (ii) project management and (iii) execution of the programmes under SA Connect up to the latest specified date for which information is available; 3) Whether any funds allocated for SA Connect have been spent in the (a) 2015-16 financial year and/or (b) since 1 April 2016 to the latest specified date; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details; 4) What amount of funding allocated for SA Connect in the 2015-16 financial year rolled over to the 2016-17 financial year?
Reply:
1. (a) R1.54 million is allocated for the implementation of SA Connect Phase 1.
(b) The allocated amount will be spent to procure broadband connectivity services for the Phase 1 sites. Detailed Breakdown:
Budget Allocation (Million) |
|||
2016/17 |
2017/18 |
2018/19 |
Total |
336 600 |
422 300 |
711 900 |
1 450 800 |
2. (a) The Department is engaging with SITA to explore options of the appointment of the service provider that will be in line with the existing procurement legislations and regulations.
(b) The lead agency should be an organisation with the following capabilities:
(i) To coordinate between public & private sector players,
(ii) To raise funding to expand fibre infrastructure,
(iii) To rollout simultaneously in all the phase 1 districts as per the Broadband Implementation Plan,
(iv) To leverage on existing infrastructure to minimise duplication.
(c) The Department is engaging stakeholders to finalise the appointment process and no requests for proposals have been published yet.
(i) - (iii) See (c) above
3) (a) In the 2015/2016 financial year R200 million was allocated for this project of which R100 million was transferred to Sentech for dual illumination and R50, 240 million to SAPO for the National Address System.
(b) No funds were spent since 1 April 2016. Because the department was engaging with the relevant stakeholders to finalise the appointment process.
4) In the 2015/2016 financial year R200 million was allocated for the project. An amount of R49, 760 million was rolled over.
23 May 2016 - NW1283
Shinn, Ms MR to ask the Minister of Telecommunications and Postal Services
(a) How much funding has been allocated for the Virtual Cyber Security Hub hosted by the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research for the 2016-17 financial year and (b) what are the specific deliverables that the specified hub must deliver against these funds; (2) (a) how much funding has been allocated for the specified hub for the (i) 2017-18 and (ii) 2018-19 financial years and (b) what items and programmes will the funding be spent on in each of the specified years; (3) whether his department is the sole funder of the specified hub; if not, (a) what is the name of any other funder, (b) what is the financial contribution of each other funder and (c) what are the specific items and programmes to be delivered against these funds in each case, respectively; if so, what is the position in this regard; (4) (a) How much did his department spend in each year that it contributed to the specified hub and (b) what items and programmes were these funds spent on in each specified year?
Reply:
I have been advised by the Department as follows:-
(1)(a) The amount allocated to the Cybersecurity Hub for the 2016/2017 financial year is R 16, 418, 000.00
(b) Specific deliverables include
- Formalise engagements with stakeholder, which supports the sharing and technical integration of cybersecurity incident information
- Operationalisation of the Proactive and Reactive services
- Increased functionality of Hub’s tools
- Assist in the enablement and establishment of sector CERTs
- Dissemination of incident and thereat information to stakeholders
- Undertaking of a cybersecurity awareness programs which includes upgrade of the Hub’s website functionality
(2)(a)(i) In the 2017/2018 financial year R 15, 325, 000.00 has been allocated
(ii) In the 2018/2019 financial year R 12, 297, 000.00has been allocated
It should be noted that the allocated budget for these two financial years are subject to change as the MTSF is yet to be finalised.
(b) The monies will be used as follows:
- Obtaining international certification for the Hub
- Establishment of both private and public sector industry specific CERTs
- Integration of incident information
- Development and deployment of cybersecurity audit and readiness tools
- Ongoing awareness programs
(3)(a) The Department is the sole funder of the Hub
(b) N/A
(c) N/A
(4)(a) In the 2014/2015 financial year R 18 533 013 was allocated
In the 2015/2016 financial year R 15 156 157 was allocated
(b) In the 2014/2015 financial year the monies were used for:
- Establishment of the Hub
- Development of Operational Processes
- Development of Policies and Procedures
In the 2015/2016 financial year the monies were used for:
- Research
- Technical and operational support
- System integration
- Facilities, facilities maintenance
- Infrastructure costs
- Stakeholder engagement
23 May 2016 - NW990
Maynier, Mr D to ask the Minister of Finance
What are the full details of the reprioritisation of funds for the 2016 Medium-Term Expenditure Framework, as highlighted on pages 57 and 58 of the 2016 Budget Review, in terms of (a) what amount of funds in Rands has been reprioritised from each (i) national department, (ii) province and (iii) municipality and (b) what percentage do the specified amounts in each case represent of funds reprioritised (i) at each level and (ii) of the total amount of funds reprioritised?
Reply:
The details of the reprioritisation of funds in the 2016 Medium-Term Expenditure Framework, subsequent to the aggregates tabled in the 2015 Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement are set out below.
(a)(i) Amounts reprioritised from national departments:
see the link: http://www.pmg.org.za/files/RNW990Table.docx
- As part of the reprioritisation exercise, the Department of Energy receives additional funding taken from the local government level: Integrated National Electrification Programme. This results in a net positive reprioritisation of R87.2 million in 2016/17.
(a)(ii) Amounts reprioritised from provinces:
The provincial department-specific impact of the provincial equitable share reprioritisation is determined through separate provincial-own budgetary processes and legislative approval. Thus the details for each province were not known at the time of tabling the 2016 national budget; however the aggregate provincial reprioritisation was. The provincial equitable share reprioritisation per province is shown in the table below.
Provincial equitable share: heres the list: http://www.pmg.org.za/files/RNW990Equitable.docx
The amount reduced from grant allocations to each recipient province was determined by the department that acts as the national transferring officer. The effect of grant reductions on provincial aggregates is shown in the table below and is informed by the respective allocation criteria for each individual grant. Details of allocation criteria are provided in the respective conditional grant frameworks for each grant as contained in 2016 Division of Revenue Bill.
Provincial conditional grants:
heres the link: http://www.pmg.org.za/files/RNW990Accountable.docx
(a)(iii) Amounts reprioritised from municipalities:
Local government equitable share:
The impact on municipalities of the R1.8 billion in reprioritisation of the local government equitable share over the MTEF is not shown separately per municipality, as many factors influenced these allocations. These are set out in the Explanatory Memorandum to the Division of Revenue (Annexure W1 to the Division of Revenue Bill and the Budget Review). The allocations amount to 26.4 per cent of the local government level reprioritisation and 5.5 per cent of the total reprioritisation over the MTEF.
The changes affecting municipal allocations include data updates to variables in the local government equitable share formula; to account for changes in projected inflation, electricity and water bulk costs and household growth rates. Significant changes also resulted from the decision by the Municipal Demarcation Board to re-determine multiple municipal boundaries, including the merging of several municipalities. All new demarcations are reflected in the 2016 Division of Revenue Bill and therefore allocations for individual municipalities in the 2015 and 2016 Division of Revenue Bills are not directly comparable where demarcations have been changed. The allocations for Special Support for Councilor Remuneration and Ward Committees also changed as a result of the merging of some municipalities.
The amount reduced from grant allocations to each recipient municipality was determined by the department that acts as the transferring officer. The aggregate grant reductions for individual grants are shown in the table below and are informed by the respective allocation criteria for each individual grant. Details of allocation criteria are provided in the respective conditional grant frameworks for each grant as contained in 2016 Division of Revenue Bill.
Local government conditional grants:
here's the link: http://www.pmg.org.za/files/RNW990conditiongrant.docx
(b)(i) &
(b)(ii) The percentage that each amount represents of the funds reprioritised in the sphere of government that it resides in is show in the tables above under (a)(i), (a)(ii) and (a)(iii). These tables above also show the percentage that funds represent of the total amount of reprioritisation over the MTEF.
Reprioritisation at each sphere of government as a percentage of the total:
see the link: http://www.pmg.org.za/files/RNW990reproriasition.docx
23 May 2016 - NW1089
Kohler-Barnard, Ms D to ask the Minister of Public Works
In respect of each province, what are the (a) names and (b) addresses of the 1 200 properties of his department that have now been declared untraceable on the records of his department?
Reply:
The Minister of Public Works
The 1 200 properties are not untraceable as suggested by the Honourable Member. Rather, the land parcels in question cannot be linked to the Geographical Information System (GIS) due to the absence of cadastral information on them. The Department of Public Works (DPW) has therefore approached the Office of the Chief Surveyor-General to provide spatial geo-reference cadastral data of South Africa for these properties in the format of the (Environmental Systems Research Institute) ESRI files that are currently being used in the Department, so that the land parcels can be linked to the GIS. It is important for all property under the custodianship of the DPW to be put on the GIS system so that the Department or the Property Management Trading Entity (PMTE) is enabled to manage immovable assets optimally, incorporating the ability to do conditionality assessments and thus provide for asset investment decisions.
Attached to this reply is Annexure A, which lists the 1 200 properties.
23 May 2016 - NW1200
Redelinghuys, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Police
(a) When did construction commence on the Dube Police Station in Winterveldt, in the City of Tshwane, (b) what are the causes for the delay in the completion of the construction of the specified police station, (c) what is the anticipated date of completion, (d) what is the budget allocation for the construction and completion of the specified police station, (e) what amount has been spent to date and (f) what is the projected final expenditure on the completion of the construction of the specified police station?
Reply:
(a) The original contract commenced on 13 November 2011 and the contract was terminated (DPW) on 13 March 2014 due to the contractor not performing his obligations. The second contract to finalise the outstanding work was awarded on 10 November 2015.
(b) The contractor failed to perform his obligations and the National Department of Public Works had to re-start the tendering process in order to appoint the new contractor for completion of the project.
(c) The anticipated date of completion is 9 July 2016.
(d) The budget allocation for the construction and completion of the specified police station is R 31 581 451-00.
(e) The amount spent to date is R 16 887 830-00.
(f) The projected expenditure for the project is R 31 581 451-00.
23 May 2016 - NW578
Tarabella - Marchesi, Ms NI to ask the Minister of Finance
With reference to each metropolitan municipality and based on the 2014-15 audited annual financial statements, what amount of (a) irregular expenditure, (b) unauthorised expenditure and (c) fruitless and wasteful expenditure was (i) reported, (ii) condoned, (iii) written off in an adjustment budget and (iv) recovered in terms of section 32 of the Municipal Finance Management Act 56 of 2003?
Reply:
The Honourable Member should note that the Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA) provides in section 32(2) that the Municipal Council must recover all irregular expenditure incurred unless the municipal council has, after an investigation by a council committee, certified the expenditure as irrecoverable and has decided to write it off. The municipal council is the only appropriate authority that should take action in relation to the irregular, unauthorised, fruitless and wasteful expenditure that has been incurred. The overall accountability process for municipal budget and expenditure must take place in a municipality, Provincial and national oversight is ‘distant’ and intervention by the two spheres only warranted as a last resort where local government has collapsed. Therefore, detailed information in this regard is therefore best obtained from the municipality concerned.
The following response is provided based on the disclosures in municipal audited annual financial statements, monitoring reports submitted by the municipality and engagements during mid-year meetings with municipal officials. The Honourable Member should also note that National Treasury has recently introduced consequence management measures that were elaborated on in MFMA Circular 76 issued in October 2015. This provided practical information on how municipalities should address such matters. It must therefore be understood within the context of the phased-in approach to implementation; hence, please noted that further actions may have been taken since these engagements with municipalities which are not reflected in this response as they are subject to ongoing monitoring and reporting.
(a) Irregular expenditure relates to categories of expenditure incurred in contravention of or not in accordance with the MFMA, Municipal Systems Act, Public Office-Bearers Act, and Supply Chain Management policy. These are listed below for metropolitan municipalities:
Buffalo City incurred R1.8 billion irregular expenditure of which none was condoned. No information was reported on amounts to be recovered, although MPAC was tasked with the responsibility to investigate such matters. During mid-year engagements the municipality advised that 8 employees were dismissed, however, no information was provided on write-offs or recovery.
City of Cape Town incurred R1 million irregular expenditure of which R85 000 was condoned. Disciplinary procedures were in place. A forensic unit was established to investigate allegations; however, no information was available on write-offs or recovery.
Ekurhuleni incurred R794 million of irregular expenditure of which R32 million was condoned; however, the majority of the cases were still under investigation by MPAC and other organs of state. In instances where MPAC had concluded investigations, these were reported to council for condonement. Section 32 processes will be used to follow up on recoveries.
eThekwini incurred R500 000 of irregular expenditure of which R400 000 was condoned. The municipality advised that it is addressing this matter in terms of the legislated processes.
City of Johannesburg incurred R1.5 billion of irregular expenditure of which R4 million was condoned. 83 cases are being investigated and 10 have been completed. The municipality has implemented measures to recover money. For example, when an employee resigns before the disciplinary case has been completed, the municipality withholds the employees pension payout. No information was available on write-offs and recoveries.
Mangaung incurred R289 million of irregular expenditure of which none was condoned. A special adjustments budget in terms of Section 32 was passed. No information was available on write-offs and recoveries.
Nelson Mandela Bay incurred R2.1 billion of irregular expenditure of which R12 million was condoned. Investigations are being conducted by Internal Audit and reports are tabled at MPAC from time to time, for recommendations and follow-up actions, including those instances where amounts are write-off and recoveries instituted. No further details were available.
City of Tshwane incurred R1.6 billion of irregular expenditure of which R28 million was condoned. A number of cases are currently under investigation. No information was available on write-offs and recoverable.
(b) Unauthorised expenditure means any expenditure incurred by a municipality otherwise than in accordance with section 15 or 11(3) of MFMA and includes overspending of total amount appropriated in the municipality’s approved budget or overspending of the total amount appropriated for a vote in the approved budget or expenditure from a vote unrelated to the department or functional area covered by the vote or expenditure of money appropriated for a specific purpose, otherwise than for that specific purpose or spending that is inconsistent with any conditional allocation, amongst others. These are listed below for metropolitan municipalities:
Buffalo City incurred R432 million of unauthorised expenditure of which none was authorised through a special adjustment budget in terms of section 28 of the MFMA read with regulation 23(6) of the Municipal Budget and Reporting Regulations. No information was available on any recoveries. However, a report was submitted to MPAC for investigation and recommendation.
City of Cape Town had reported no unauthorised expenditure.
Ekurhuleni had reported no unauthorised expenditure.
eThekwini had reported no unauthorised expenditure.
City of Johannesburg incurred R2.7 billion of unauthorised expenditure. No information was provided on amounts authorised through an adjustment budget in terms of section 28 of the MFMA read with regulation 23(6) of the Municipal Budget and Reporting Regulations, or on amounts recovered.
Mangaung incurred R2.1 billion of unauthorised expenditure. A special adjustments budget in terms of Section 28 of the MFMA read with regulations 23(6) of the Municipal Budget and Reporting Regulations was passed by council. No information was available on recoveries.
Nelson Mandela Bay incurred R780 million of unauthorised expenditure, of which R623 million was authorised through a special adjustment budget. No information was available on recoveries.
City of Tshwane incurred R2 billion of unauthorised expenditure, of which R1.2 billion was authorised through an adjustment budget. A report was tabled in Council to address accounting-related transactions, such as over-expenditure relating to provision for depreciation, loss on disposal of assets, finance charges and debt impairment.
(c) Fruitless and Wasteful Expenditure relates to expenditure incurred that could have been avoided had reasonable care been exercised. These are listed below for metropolitan municipalities:
Buffalo City incurred R5 million of fruitless and wasteful expenditure. No expenditure was condoned and no information was available on write-offs or recoveries. However, a report was submitted to MPAC for investigation and recommendations.
City of Cape Town incurred R440 00 of fruitless and wasteful expenditure, of which none was condoned; however, R146 000 was recovered. The municipality is in the process of condoning the outstanding amounts.
Ekurhuleni incurred R181 million of fruitless and wasteful expenditure, of which R1.2 million was condoned. These have been referred to MPAC and other organs of state for investigation.
eThekwini had reported no fruitless and wasteful expenditure.
City of Johannesburg incurred R20 million fruitless and wasteful expenditure of which R23 000 was condoned, and R361 000 was still to be recovered. The remainder is subject to the outcome of further investigations.
Mangaung incurred R29 million of fruitless and wasteful expenditure. A special adjustments budget in terms of Section 32 was passed by council. No information was available on condoned amounts, write-offs or recoveries.
Nelson Mandela Bay incurred R551 million of fruitless and wasteful expenditure of which R226 000 was condoned. MPAC are still investigating. No confirmation of outcomes was received with regard to write-offs or recoveries.
City of Tshwane incurred R19 million of fruitless and wasteful expenditure of which R513 000 was condoned. A number of cases are still under investigation. No confirmation of outcomes were received on write-offs or recoveries.
20 May 2016 - NW1417
Mhlongo, Mr TW to ask the Minister in The Presidency: Women
Whether (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her are running development programmes for (i) small businesses and (ii) co-operatives; if not, why not; if so, in each case, (aa) what are the relevant details, (bb) what amount has been budgeted and (cc) how many jobs will be created through the specified development programmes in the 2016-17 financial year?
Reply:
a). No, it is not our mandate
b). No, it is not CGE's mandate
Approved by the Minister on Acting
Date: 18/05/2016
20 May 2016 - NW153
Hoosen, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Social Development
(1)How long does a (a) social worker, (b) student social worker and (c) social auxiliary worker on average have to wait to be registered by the SA Council for Social Service Professions (SACSSP); (2) How does the overall functioning of the SACSSP impact on the availability of social workers; (3) whether the SACSSP paid R81 000 to a certain company (details furnished); if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details?
Reply:
- The average turnaround time for the registration of all categories of social work practitioners is one day provided that applicants furnish the council with all the required documentation.
- In terms of the Act the SACSSP has three complementary mandates to execute, namely, registration and professional services, education, training and development as well as professional conduct. These mandates are executed in relation to all registered social workers available to practice in the country.
- Def Music Studio was contracted by the SACSSP for publication of promotional material during 2006. An amount of R81 000.00 was paid for services rendered.
20 May 2016 - NW1248
Maynier, Mr D to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services
1) With reference to the Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of Fraud, Corruption, Impropriety or Irregularity in the Strategic Defence Procurement Packages, what is the (a) total amount spent and (b) breakdown of such expenditure on the specified commission since its establishment in 2011 to date; 2) With reference to the Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of Fraud, Corruption, Impropriety or Irregularity in the Strategic Defence Procurement Packages, what is the (a) total amount spent and (b) breakdown of such expenditure on the specified commission since its establishment in 2011 to date; 3) What is the (a) total amount spent and (b) breakdown of such expenditure on the compensation of each (i) evidence leader, (ii) forensic auditor and (iii) research consultant working for the specified commission since its establishment in 2011 to date?
Reply:
1. (a) The total amount spent on the Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of Fraud, Corruption, Impropriety or Irregularity in the Strategic Defence Procurement Packages as at 31 March 2016 is R137, 264, 521.
(b) The table below provides the breakdown of the expenditure since its establishment in 2011 to date:
2. (a) Total amount spent on evidence leaders, forensic auditor and research consultant is R93, 148, 779.
(b) The tables below provide the breakdown of expenditure as follows:
(i) Evidence leaders:
(ii) Forensic Auditor:
(iii) Research Consultant:
20 May 2016 - NW1259
Marais, Mr EJ to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises
(1) Whether, with reference to the unveiling of a new arms factory in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia on 27 March 2016 in partnership with South Africa, (a) the National Treasury and/or (b) Parliament were advised of the new arms merger between Denel SOC Ltd and the Saudi Military Industries Corporation; if not, why not, in each case; if so, on which dates in each case; (2) whether (a) she and/or (b) Denel SOC Ltd (i) notified and/or (ii) consulted the SA National Defence Force for recommendations prior to the specified merger; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details; (3) (a) which countries will use the armaments produced by the specified factory, (b) how much money was put forward by South Africa towards this merger and (c) what is the estimated financial return that this merger will generate?
Reply:
1. (a)(b) No merger or any kind of joint venture has been formed between Denel SOC Ltd, its subsidiaries or associated companies and the Military Industries Corporation (MIC) in relation to the new arms factory in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. However, Rheinmetall Denel Munition (Pty) Ltd, an associate of Denel, has designed and built the plant on a turnkey solution basis, as part of the supplier customer transaction arrangement. Therefore, there was no need to either inform or seek approval from Government or Parliament. |
|
2. (a)(b)(i)(ii) As indicated above in (1)(a) and (b), there was no requirement to notify or consult the SANDF. |
|
3 (a) Denel is not privy to the information. |
|
(b) No funds from South Africa were put into the project. |
|
(c) See (1) and (2) above. |